LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Published
4:00 am PST, Saturday, December 13, 1997

HELP OUT AND LEARN ABOUT THE HOMELESS

Editor -- An unsympathetic Raymond Batz writes in the December 12 letters section that Americans have a "less than 1 percent chance" of being poor if they finish high school, get married and keep a job for a year. He uses this argument to blame the homeless for their situations.

The last time I checked, San Francisco had about 5,000 homeless for about 800,000 residents, a rate of less than 1 percent. I guess then he'd agree that many of the homeless are not responsible for the sad fates they have been dealt.

If he wants to help with the situation, maybe he can stop wasting time complaining and could instead volunteer to teach adult illiteracy classes, work at a drug rehab center, or hire a homeless person at his place of business. Then not only would he directly help these people, but he would learn the truth about many of the homeless and might even develop an ability to sympathize too.

COMMON SENSE TICKET

Editor -- I don't know Raymond Batz (Letters, December 5), but I'd be happy to run as vice president with him at the head of the ticket representing, shall we say, the Common Sense Party. His letter on "the homeless" went directly to the point on the issue of individual responsibility. Run, Ray, run.

BILL FRASER

San Francisco

MISANTHROPIC VAGRANTS

Editor -- Apparently suburban isolation buffers Merle Elkus (Letters, December 5) from the reality of vagrants dragging stolen carts. Elkus thinks San Franciscans should be providing carts for these non-resident bums, in addition to the millions of dollars in subsidies this "Heartless City" already provides. We wonder if Elkus endorses such an absurd waste of San Mateo tax revenue as well.

We are not dealing with socioeconomic victims. We are dealing with misanthropic vagrants who threaten and assault residents, flout laws with impunity, and refuse any assistance beyond hard cash.

Friends in the suburbs fear entering San Francisco for any purpose. They won't expose themselves or their children to the hideous street scenes and constant threat of violence. Vagrants with stolen shopping carts are destroying San Francisco's economic viability as well as degrading the urban environment for everyone.

MOVE THEM TO THE 'BURBS

Editor -- Re: The letter in the December 5 Chronicle from Merle Kingsley Elkus where the author condemns cruel San Francisco for its failure to provide shopping carts to the homeless. Might I suggest that Merle Elkus of San Mateo contact that locality's government about appropriating that county's tax dollars for shopping carts for the homeless whom that county can then heartfully invite to its community.

Even better, why not propose that the ultra upscale, chichi mar kets in San Mateo not only offer their stores' shopping carts to the homeless, but also allow the homeless to loiter in front of their supermarkets rather than subjecting them to "roam(ing) the streets of our unusually costly city."

Ms. McCARTHY San Francisco

MONEY FOR MUNI

Editor -- I hope Ken Garcia's excellent column about Emilio Cruz and Muni elicits lots of support for Emilio. He has an incredibly tough job to do, and, as he has said in the past, "there is no quick fix" for Muni. I am as disgusted with Muni's performance as anyone: late buses, no buses at all, buses breaking down, buses roaring down streets where they don't belong, etc. I do realize, though, that in addition to the fact that problems which have been so long in developing are not going to go away quickly, a certain amount of truculence -- even retaliation --on the part of management and workers can be expected when such a profound restructuring is attempted. Throw some more money at Emilio and Muni and give him some support -- we need him!

WHY WE NEED THE DOTS

Editor -- That guy who wrote about the Bott's Dots was right. Of course if everyone else drove as carefully as he and me, there'd be no need for government to remind us what lane to drive in. The problem is, everyone else does nothing but speed, drift, turn without signaling, tailgate, and other offenses.

So until he can rid the road of most of the people on it, let's keep those Dots there, just for them. Let's be real: since no one but thee and me knows how to drive, any aid invented for everyone else has got to be a blessing.

RACE-BASED PARANOIA

Editor -- "A Racial Double Standard," UC Berkeley Professor William Drummond's rant about the Sprewell controversy, is in fact a chilling argument against academic tenure. Drummond uses up half your Decem ber 9 Op-Ed page attempting to prove that the media jumped on Sprewell because "racial feelings underlie the unwarranted harshness of the criticism." Drummond should leave the luxury of his university sanctuary and spend more time in newsrooms and with reporters.

Drummond (along with his quick-to-see-racism-everywhere colleagues Willie Brown and Elihu Harris) should take a breather from race-based paranoia and remember that there is a simple difference between right and wrong. Sprewell's attack was wrong; there is no rationalization for it. If Drummond and his ilk spent more time separated from the security and comfort of academe perhaps they would realize that they are out of date.

PETER LAUFER

Fairfax

VIOLENCE IN SPORTS

Editor -- I am offended that people like Mayor Brown and William Drummond are making the Latrell Sprewell incident a race issue when the real problem is violence in professional sports. Certainly racism exists in the NBA and in sports coverage as it does in society. But the issue here has much more to do with an environment in professional sports that condones, tolerates and encourages violence. To assert that Sprewell was justified in choosing violence to resolve conflict because he was provoked and because African American men historically have been disrespected in this country is to undermine the efforts of many who are working with young people to develop alternatives to violence when provoked, or faced with disrespect and racism.

Sprewell may have believed that his response was reasonable given the Warriors' failure to sanction a coach with a history of player abuse, but that does not mean that his response was right. I speak as an African American woman and physician who has seen how violence has harmed our youth. If we say violence is acceptable for conflict resolution, we have nothing to say when young people use violence to resolve conflicts.

PATTI CULROSS, M.D.

San Francisco

'TALK TURKEY'

Editor -- Dr. Bartos made an educated guess regarding "cold turkey" (Letters, December 9). Unfortunately, the requisite expertise would be in the area of etymology, not medicine. The term appears to have entered the language during the 1920s. Its origin is obscure and not likely to be related to the appearance of the addict's skin, but rather to have derived from the earlier "talk turkey" -- to talk honestly.

How turkeys came to be associated with straight forwardness is also unknown. Some think it came from turkey farmers and their direct speech, and wordsmith Nigel Rees has said this phrase first appeared in America with the Pilgrim fathers, who always seemed to want turkeys when they traded with the Indians. After so many roundabout approaches, the Indians would get sick of it and greet them with: "You want to talk turkey?"